Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-07T20:11:21.730Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Appraisal of meta-analysis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2018

Apu Chakraborty ,
James P. Warner  and
Robert Blizard
Apu Chakraborty
Affiliation:
University Department of Psychiatry, Royal Free Hospital Pond Street, London NW3 2QG; e-mail [email protected]
James P. Warner*
Affiliation:
University Department of Psychiatry, Royal Free Hospital Pond Street, London NW3 2QG; e-mail [email protected]
Robert Blizard
Affiliation:
University Department of Psychiatry, Royal Free Hospital Pond Street, London NW3 2QG; e-mail [email protected]
*
∗Correspondence
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Aims and method

Prompted by a clinical question, we critically appraised a meta-analysis of neuroimaging in our evidence-based journal club.

Results

The results of the meta-analysis suggested differences in ventricular size and sulcal width between controls and people with schizophrenia and mood disorders. However, we were unable to answer the question that prompted this exercise.

Clinical implications

Although the evidence-based medicine approach facilitates appraisal of complex articles, some clinical questions are not yet answerable.

Type
Evidence-Based Psychiatry
Information
Psychiatric Bulletin , Volume 22 , Issue 11 , November 1998 , pp. 698 - 701
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright
Copyright © 1998 The Royal College of Psychiatrists

References

Bero, L. & Rennie, D. (1995) The Cochrane collaboration. Preparing, maintaining and disseminating systematic reviews of the effects of health care. Journal of the American Medical Association, 274, 1935–1938.Google Scholar
Cohen, J. (1988) Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioural Sciences (2nd edn). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Egger, M. & Davey Smith, G. (1998) Meta-analysis: bias in location and selection of studies. British Medical Journal 316, 61–66.Google Scholar
Egger, M., Schneider, M. & Davey Smith, G. (1998) Spurious precision? Meta-analysis of observational studies. British Medical Journal 316, 140–144.Google Scholar
Elkis, H., Friedman, L., Wise, A., et al (1995) Meta-analyses of studies of ventricular enlargement and cortical sulcal prominence in mood disorders – comparisons with controls or patients with schizophrenia. Archives of General Psychiatry, 52, 735–746.Google Scholar
Greenhalgh, T. (1997) The Medline database. British Medical Journal 315, 180–183.Google Scholar
Le Lorier, J., Gregoire, G., Benhaddad, A., et al (1997) Discrepancies between meta-analyses and subsequent large randomised controlled trials. New England Journal of Medicine, 337, 536–542.Google Scholar
Oxman, A. D., Cook, D. J. & Guyatt, G. H. (1994) Users' guide to the medical literature VI. How to use an overview. Journal of the American Medical Association, 272, 1367–1371.Google Scholar
Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.